Pregnancy outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus by models of care: a retrospective cohort study.
clinical audit
diabetes in pregnancy
obstetrics
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 09 2022
26 09 2022
Historique:
entrez:
27
9
2022
pubmed:
28
9
2022
medline:
30
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To compare birth outcomes of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with background obstetric population, stratified by models of care. Retrospective cohort study. A tertiary referral centre in Sydney, Australia. All births 1 January 2018 to 30 November 2020. Births <24 weeks, multiple gestations and women with pre-existing diabetes were excluded. Data were obtained from electronic medical records. Women were classified according to GDM status and last clinic attended prior to delivery. Model of care included attendance at dedicated GDM obstetric clinics, and routine antenatal care. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), pre-term birth (PTB), induction of labour (IOL), operative delivery, small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age, postpartum haemorrhage, obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS), neonatal hypoglycaemia, neonatal hypothermia, neonatal respiratory distress, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. The GDM rate was 16.3%, with 34.0% of women managed in dedicated GDM clinics. Women with GDM had higher rates of several adverse outcomes. Only women with GDM attending non-dedicated clinics had increased odds of HDP (adjusted OR (adj OR) 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.0), PTB (adj OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.0), OASIS (adj OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.0), similar odds of induction (adj OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.1) compared with non-GDM women. There were increased odds of NICU admission (adj OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.8) similar to women attending high-risk GDM clinics. Women with GDM receiving care in lower risk clinics had similar or higher rates of adverse outcomes. Pathways of care need to be similar in all women with GDM.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36167384
pii: bmjopen-2022-065063
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065063
pmc: PMC9516164
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e065063Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jun 16;352(24):2477-86
pubmed: 15951574
Med J Aust. 1998 Jul 20;169(2):93-7
pubmed: 9700346
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 Oct;60(5):720-728
pubmed: 32157686
Diabetes Care. 2010 Mar;33(3):676-82
pubmed: 20190296
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 05;1:CD012910
pubmed: 29303230
Int J Womens Health. 2010 Oct 07;2:339-51
pubmed: 21151681
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Aug;56(4):333-5
pubmed: 27484169
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jul;173(1):146-56
pubmed: 7631672
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Sep;205(3):282.e1-7
pubmed: 22071065
Diabetes. 1991 Dec;40 Suppl 2:35-8
pubmed: 1748263
Diabetes Care. 2007 Jul;30 Suppl 2:S141-6
pubmed: 17596462
N Engl J Med. 2009 Oct 1;361(14):1339-48
pubmed: 19797280
N Engl J Med. 2008 May 8;358(19):1991-2002
pubmed: 18463375
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014 Feb;103(2):186-96
pubmed: 24300016
BMC Pediatr. 2013 Apr 20;13:59
pubmed: 23601190
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Dec 15;17(24):
pubmed: 33333879